Loading...
30836_ConceptDesignMemorandum_NoAttachments Page | 1 CONCEPT DESIGN MEMORANDUM March 24, 2025 Project# 30836 To: Jarod Nygren, City of Kalispell Development Services Director From: Liz Kaniecki, PE, Rachel Grosso, AICP, and Andy Daleiden, PE RE: Kalispell Main Street Safety Action Plan – Concept Design Memorandum Introduction In 2024, the City of Kalispell developed the Safety Action Plan (SAP) (Reference 1), which is a comprehensive and well-defined strategy for preventing fatal and serious injury roadway crashes, with a particular focus on vulnerable road users (pedestrians and bicyclists). The SAP identified ten “Priority Locations” for safety and mobility projects. In August 2024, Kalispell City Council directed City staff to conceptually design safety and mobility improvements for Main Street (Montana Street to 13th Street/Airport Road), 1st Avenue E (Parkline Trail to 13th Street E) and 1st Avenue W (Center Street to 12th Street W) to visually communicate the proposed projects and to inform a concept-level cost estimate that can be used to pursue future funding for design and construction. The study area is displayed in Figure 1. This technical memorandum outlines the following elements that support the concept designs:  Decision-making process for selecting safety and mobility treatments, as well as design criteria for each treatment  Results of the traffic operations analysis for 2024 existing and 2045 future conditions  Environmental and hydraulic impacts of concept designs  Community engagement  Concept-level cost estimates  Policy recommendations The concept design drawings are included as Attachment A. March 2025 Page | 2 Figure 1. Main Street Safety Action Plan - Phase 2 Study Area March 2025 Page | 3 Concept Designs Throughout the development of the concept designs, the design team has met with partner agencies to discuss various design elements and incorporate agency preferences. The project management team (PMT) for Phase 2 included representatives from the City of Kalispell Community Development and Public Works Departments, the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) – Missoula District, and Flathead County. These meetings and events included:  PMT Meeting #1 – An initial kick-off meeting was held in October 2024 to introduce the purpose, scope, and schedule of the project, as well as to discuss the traffic volumes and traffic operations analysis results for data collected in August 2024.  Concept Design Workshop – A concept design workshop was held in November 2024 with PMT members to discuss design-specific criteria to be implemented into the concept designs. A design criteria spreadsheet that documents the standards, guidelines, and considerations for various roadway components was developed, discussed, and confirmed during this 3-hour workshop. This spreadsheet contains specific design criteria (i.e., lane withs, curb radii) that were implemented into the concept designs. Attachment B contains the design criteria spreadsheet that was developed and updated per agency comments.  PMT Meeting #2 – Initial concept designs were presented in two (2) separate meetings in December 2024, one specifically to discuss the Main Street corridor (PMT Meeting 2A) and one to discuss the 1st Avenue corridors (PMT Meeting 2B). Agency comments and questions were discussed during these meetings; the concept designs were updated accordingly, and cost estimates were developed following these meetings.  Community Engagement – In January 2025, a series of community engagement events were held in downtown Kalispell to inform community members about Phase 2 and solicit feedback on the concept designs. Three pop-up events were held on January 28th at Montana Coffee Traders (Main St), ImagineIF Library (1st Ave E), and Bias Brewing (Main St). On January 29th, three community meetings were held at Kalispell City Hall to facilitate dialogue with business and property owners. On January 30th, an Open House was held at Kalispell City Hall for all community members to participate in an interactive review of the concept designs. An online, interactive page for commenting on the concept designs was also available for community members unable to attend in-person.  PMT Meeting #3 – In January and February 2025, PMT Meeting 3A and 3B were held to discuss the finalization of the concept designs and cost estimates, based on the feedback received through the community engagement in January 2025.  PMT Meeting #4 – The final meeting of the project management team was held in March 2025 to review the final concept designs and cost estimates, as well as to review the content of this memorandum. Attachment C contains meeting notes from each of the meetings listed above. March 2025 Page | 4 Key Safety and Mobility Treatments The concept designs for each corridor incorporated several safety treatments for all road users. This section provides a description of the safety treatments considered in the concept design.  Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB): RRFBs are warning signs with flashing lights installed at marked crosswalks that can be activated by people crossing via pushbuttons. This FWHA Proven Safety Countermeasure (Reference 2) increases the visibility and awareness of vulnerable road users crossing the street at unsignalized intersections. Exhibit 1 displays an example of an activated RRFB. Exhibit 1. Example RRFB in Downtown Kalispell (Source: Kittelson)  Curb Extensions: Curb extensions, also known as bulb-outs, are geometric elements used to constrain roadway widths to provide additional pedestrian space, reduce vehicle speeds, reduce pedestrian crossing distances, increase driver visibility, and reallocate roadway space. This treatment is particularly well-suited to downtown areas, as well as in residential areas, (Reference 3) where there is existing or projected vulnerable road user activity. Exhibit 2 displays an example of curb extension. March 2025 Page | 5 Exhibit 2. Example Curb Extensions (Source: Kittelson)  High-Visibility Crosswalks: High-visibility crosswalks (typically installed with retroreflective thermoplastic pavement markings) increase driver awareness of marked crossing locations. Exhibit 3 displays an example of a high-visibility crosswalk. Exhibit 3. Example High-Visibility Crosswalk (Source: Kittelson)  Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI): LPIs are a type of signal timing improvement which provides a pedestrian walk interval (typically between 3-7 seconds) ahead of the concurrent vehicle through movement to allow pedestrians to establish a presence in the crosswalk prior to March 2025 Page | 6 vehicles being given the green indication that allows conflicting turning movements. This FHWA Proven Safety Countermeasure (Reference 2) is also typically installed with audible pedestrian signal equipment (i.e., pushbuttons, pedestrian signal heads with countdowns). Exhibit 4 displays an example of an LPI – the through movement has a red indication while the pedestrian signal is activated. Exhibit 4. Example LPI (Source: Kittelson)  Raised Bike Lanes: Raised bike lanes are dedicated spaces for bicyclists to use that are level with, and separate from, the sidewalk. These spaces can be delineated with signage and sometimes pavement coloring. Exhibit 5 displays an example of a raised bike lane. The walk sign illuminates in advance of the vehicle traffic March 2025 Page | 7 Exhibit 5. Example Raised Bike Lane (Source: Kittelson)  Raised Intersections: Raised intersections are intersections that are level with the sidewalk. Near the stop bars for vehicles, a gentle slope is used to bring the intersection to the height of the curb, rather than using curb ramps to bring the sidewalk to the street level. Raised intersections calm traffic with the speed hump-like effect for each vehicle approach, while increasing driver awareness of vulnerable road users. Exhibit 6 displays an example of a raised intersection. Exhibit 6. Example Raised Intersection (Source: Kittelson) The following sections describe each corridor and what improvements were incorporated into the concept designs. Attachment A provides the concept design drawings for all three (3) corridors. March 2025 Page | 8 Main Street Main Street Design Elements The concept design for Main Street between Montana Street and 13th Street/Airport Road includes the following treatments:  Reallocate one vehicle through lane in each direction (northbound / southbound) between Center Street and 13th Street/Airport Road in order to create a center lane with left-turn pockets at intersections – Convert the outside southbound through lane at Center Street / Main Street to a drop right- turn only lane – Remove left-turn restrictions at signalized intersections along Main Street  Install a median between 7th Street and 13th Street that connects with the existing Flathead County Courthouse – Install a northbound left-turn lane at 7th Street – Add southbound left-turn restriction at 7th Street – Restrict access to right-in, right-out (RIRO) at 12th Street  Construct single-lane roundabouts at the following locations: – 11th Street / Main Street – 13th Street / Airport Road / Main Street  Install a 10’ sidewalk with a 9’ buffer (buffer width may vary pending right-of-way constraints) – Buffer may be constructed with stamped concrete, permeable pavers, or some combination of the two  Retain 8’ parallel on-street vehicular parking on both sides of Main Street – Widen parking lane to 12’ between 6th and 7th Streets on the west side to facilitate pick-up / drop-off at St Matthews School  Implement a 15 MPH School Zone on Main Street between 6th and 7th Streets for St Matthews School  Install RRFBs at the following locations: – 5th Street / Main Street – 7th Street / Main Street  Install high-visibility crosswalks at each intersection  Construct curb extensions at each corner of each intersection, as appropriate  Install LPIs at all signalized intersections Photo renderings of these elements were developed for two locations along Main Street to illustrate the safety and mobility treatments included in the concept designs. Exhibit 7 displays the photo rendering of Main Street looking north towards 1st Street, and Exhibit 8 displays the photo rendering of Main Street looking south towards 7th Street. March 2025 Page | 9 Exhibit 7. Main Street, Looking North Towards 1st Street Exhibit 8. Main Street, Looking South Towards 7th Street March 2025 Page | 10 Main Street Typical Cross Sections Figure 2 illustrates the typical cross sections of the Main Street corridor, which show the general widths of each geometric element that is incorporated into the concept design. The right-of-way linework provided for the concept design indicates varying widths of right-of-way along the corridor and does not consistently include areas such as the sidewalk or buffer spaces based on the aerial imagery. The concept designs assume there will be no impacts behind the existing back of sidewalk. Right-of-way linework will need to be confirmed and any impacts will need to be further evaluated as the concept designs move into future phasing. C: \ U s e r s \ l k a n i e c k i \ a p p d a t a \ l o c a l \ t e m p \ A c P u b l i s h _ 2 8 9 8 4 \ 3 0 8 3 6 _ T y p i c a l S e c t i o n s . d w g M a r 1 1 , 2 0 2 5 - 4 : 4 1 p m - l k a n i e c k i L a y o u t T a b : F i g u r e 2 _ M a i n S t r e e t T y p i c a l S e c t i o n s Typical Sections Main Street (Parkline Trail to 13th Street / Airport Rd) Kalispell, MT 2 Kalispell Main Street Safety Action Plan Concept Design March 2025 Figure March 2025 Page | 12 Main Street Concept Design Considerations The following concept design considerations were discussed with the concept design team and PMT. The outcomes of these discussions are summarized below.  Main Street Roadway Reallocation: The centerpiece of the Main Street concept design is the reallocation of the existing roadway space from a four-lane cross section with parallel parking on both sides, to a three-lane cross section with parallel parking on both sides. Known as a road reconfiguration, a road reallocation, or a road diet, this conversion is noted by the Federal Highway Administration as a Proven Safety Countermeasure for reducing fatal and serious crashes, with research indicating up to a 47% reduction in total crashes (Reference 2). There are several safety benefits associated with a 4-to-3-lane conversion, including a reduction in rear-end and turning crashes, reduced congestion due to dedicated lanes for turning vehicles, shorter crossing distances for pedestrians, and traffic calming for busy corridors due to the visual narrowing of drivers’ sight field, which impels slower and more careful driving, with the associated noise and air pollution reductions. This treatment is particularly recommended by FHWA for “four-lane undivided highways that experience relatively high crash frequencies — especially as traffic volumes and turning movements increase over time — resulting in conflicts between high-speed through traffic, left-turning vehicles and other road users”. – This concept design includes one lane in each direction, with a center lane that has left turn pockets to facilitate all vehicle movements at intersections. Currently, left turns are not allowed along much of this Main Street section (7th Street SB, 6th Street NB/SB, 3rd Street NB/SB, 2nd Street NB/SB, 1st Street NB/SB); providing a dedicated left turn lane would allow drivers to make left turns without blocking through traffic, while improving overall circulation in the downtown. – The reallocated space will be utilized to widen the sidewalks and boulevard/buffer space along Main Street, which will improve the pedestrian experience in downtown while providing space for public amenities in the predominantly commercial area. – Narrower lane widths were considered during the initial concept development, however it was determined that 12’ lanes should be maintained at this time to accommodate larger vehicles (i.e., WB-67 trucks) and to be consistent with MDT’s current design standards for Main Street’s roadway classification, an Urban Principal Arterial. A 12’ width still provides flexibility to narrow lanes in the future through pavement restriping, should that be a desired approach to further reduce vehicle speeds or reallocate space for other uses.  On-Street Parking: Due to the existing parking demand in the downtown, dedicated on-street parallel parking lanes will be maintained on both sides of Main Street. Prior to the Main Street SAP, the City considered implementing angled parking in the downtown area to increase the number of available spaces; however, the Kalispell community responded negatively to this proposal, and as such, angled parking was not considered as part of this effort. The proposed parking width is 8’ along Main Street except for the west side of Main Street between 5th Street and 6th Street, which serves as a student pick-off and drop-off zone for St. Matthew’s School. The proposed width for this block of parking is 12’ to accommodate the space needed for student pick-up and drop-off.  Sidewalk Space: The proposed sidewalk width is 10’ along the Main Street corridor. It is important to note that while this facility satisfies the minimum width for a pedestrian space to serve as a shared-use path per AASHTO standards and is consistent with the desired minimum March 2025 Page | 13 pathway width from MDT’s and the City’s standards (Reference 4 and Reference 5, respectively), it is currently against City code to ride a bicycle on a sidewalk (Reference 6), and as such is not considered a shared-use path for the purposes of this project. The 10’ sidewalk is intended to serve pedestrian traffic, in addition to providing space for public amenities along the Main Street corridor.  Boulevard Space: The proposed boulevard/buffer space is 9’, as overall road right-of-way allows. Right-of-way may vary along the Main Street corridor; where space is constrained, space may be reduced from the buffer space to allow other design elements to be a consistent width along the corridor. The buffer space is proposed to be mostly hardscape (stamped concrete) to allow businesses to use the space for amenities (i.e., outdoor seating, temporary vendor tables, placards, etc.) and for ease of maintenance. The concept design team and PMT have explored various options and locations where green space can be incorporated. These options include permeable pavers, grass, small shrubs or low laying plants, and bioswales. The installation of any landscaping would require a joint agreement between partner agencies on maintenance responsibilities. Based on public feedback during the community engagement in January 2025, there is a desire for increased green space along the corridor. In discussions with the partner agencies, it was decided that the buffer space would be the most appropriate location for any green space, as the raised median (discussed in the next bullet) will primarily serve as snow storage during the winter season and must be accessible by snowplows for ease of snow removal. Because the northern section of Main Street (between Center Street and 7th Street) is primarily commercially oriented, the buffer space is proposed to be hardscape to allow room for any business amenities. The buffer space in the middle and southern sections of Main Street (south of 7th Street) is proposed to include green space and is dependent on cost and maintenance responsibilities.  Raised Median: A 12’ continuous, raised median is proposed between 6th Street and 7th Street and between 11th Street and 13th Street. Both 6th Street and 7th Street are one-way streets between Main Street and 4th Avenue W, and as such there are no left turns onto Main Street on this block, and this space can be reallocated for greater separation between travel lanes and serve as a median refuge for pedestrians crossing Main Street at 7th Street. Both landscaping and hardscaping options were proposed for the raised median, both of which can accommodate snow storage as part of the overall winter maintenance on the corridor. Presently, snow removal on Main Street is completed by blowing snow to the center of the roadway and hauling the snow away. To ensure snowplow access to the median, partner agencies requested that the median is either stamped concrete or permeable pavers to facilitate snowblower access.  Curb Extension Radius: Design vehicles provided by the City and MDT were used to determine the radius used for curb extensions, which included a fire truck and an SU-40, both of which turn onto and off of Main Street today. A curb radius of 35’ was determined to be the minimum radius to accommodate the design vehicles and was incorporated into the concept designs.  RRFB Locations: The locations of the RRFBs were determined based on proximity to key destinations for pedestrians (i.e., ImagineIF Library, St. Matthew’s School, other pedestrian routes) and community feedback received during the development of the Main Street SAP (Reference 1). Two RRFB systems are proposed to be installed at each identified location, one on each crossing across Main Street. Installing an RRFB system at each of the crossings increases driver visibility and awareness on approach and alerts drivers to stop prior to entering the intersection, rather than stopping in the middle of the intersection if the RRFB is located on March 2025 Page | 14 the far side of the intersection for approaching traffic. The flashing beacons will be coordinated so that when one is activated, all beacons in the intersection system will flash. This treatment is demonstrated in Exhibit 9. Exhibit 9. Photo Rendering of Coordinated RRFBs Flashing 1st Avenue East The Main Street SAP identified 1st Avenue East as a potential primary corridor for bicyclists within the downtown area, in addition to being a priority location for pedestrian safety improvements. Phase 2 focused on developing a concept layout of bicycle facilities and pedestrian safety improvements along the corridor. During the development of the concept design, the City and partner agencies decided to prioritize pedestrian safety improvements due to roadway constraints related to winter maintenance and funding constraints. This memorandum includes the work completed on bicycle facilities for the City and its partner agencies to revisit in the future. 1st Avenue East Design Elements The concept design for 1st Avenue East (Center Street to 13th Street E) includes the following treatments:  Remove dedicated left turn lanes on the minor (east/west) approaches at the following intersections: – 3rd Street E / 1st Avenue E – 4th Street E / 1st Avenue E – 5th Street E / 1st Avenue E  Install raised intersections at the following locations: – 2nd Street E / 1st Avenue E – 4th Street E / 1st Avenue E – 12th Street E / 1st Avenue E – 13th Street E / 1st Avenue E  Install RRFBs at the following locations: – 3rd Street E / 1st Avenue E March 2025 Page | 15 – 5th Street E / 1st Avenue E  Construct curb extensions at each corner of each intersection where appropriate  Install high-visibility crosswalks at each intersection  Convert 11th Street E / 1st Avenue E from an all-way stop-control (AWSC) to a two-way stop- control (TWSC) with the stop-control on the minor street (11th Street E)  Install LPIs at all signalized intersections Figure 3 illustrates the typical cross sections of 1st Avenue E, which shows the general widths of each geometric element that is incorporated into the concept design. Similarly to what was mentioned above for Main Street, right-of-way linework provided for the concept design indicates varying widths of right- of-way along the 1st Avenue E corridor and does not consistently include areas such as the sidewalk or buffer spaces based on the aerial imagery. The concept design assumes there will be no impacts behind the existing back of sidewalk, but right-of-way impacts will need to be verified in future phases of the project. C: \ U s e r s \ l k a n i e c k i \ a p p d a t a \ l o c a l \ t e m p \ A c P u b l i s h _ 2 8 9 8 4 \ 3 0 8 3 6 _ T y p i c a l S e c t i o n s . d w g M a r 1 1 , 2 0 2 5 - 4 : 4 1 p m - l k a n i e c k i L a y o u t T a b : F i g u r e 3 _ 1 s t A v e E T y p i c a l S e c t i o n s Typical Sections 1st Avenue E (Center Street E to 12th Street E) Kalispell, MT 3 Kalispell Main Street Safety Action Plan Concept Design March 2025 Figure March 2025 Page | 17 1st Avenue East Design Considerations  Lane Width: The proposed lane width is 11’, which is a 1’ reduction from the existing 12’ lanes. Narrowing the lane width helps to reduce traffic speeds and allows space to be reallocated to other uses.  Center Left-Turn Lane: The concept design team and City of Kalispell discussed the need to maintain the center left-turn lane across the corridor. Removing the center left-turn lane would narrow the roadway, which would encourage slower speeds and provide additional space for other uses such as sidewalk or buffer space. The traffic analysis demonstrated low left-turning volumes (generally 10-20 left turns) at all intersections along the 1st Avenue East corridor, which indicates that a dedicated left-turn lane is not needed to meet acceptable traffic operations. However, current winter maintenance practices involve plowing snow to the center of the roadway, which necessitates the center left-turn lane to provide adequate storage and accessibility for snow removal. Per the City’s desired approach, the center left-turn lane will be maintained on 1st Avenue East.  Minor Street Left-Turn Lanes: Minor street left-turn lanes are proposed to be removed as part of this concept as they are not needed from an operational perspective. Removing the minor street left-turn lanes allows space for curb extensions to be constructed without reducing on- street parking along the side streets.  On-Street Parking: Due to existing demand for vehicular parking on 1st Avenue East and the strong desire from both the public and the City to maintain as much on-street parking as possible, the concept design proposes to maintain existing on-street parking. There may be future opportunities for the City to explore public parking options for utilizing existing parking lots adjacent to this corridor that could help alleviate the need for on-street parking, which would allow for the reallocation of space for other uses, such as wider sidewalks, increased buffer/boulevard space, or on-street bicycle facilities.  Raised Intersection Locations: Based on the safety evaluation performed in the Main Street SAP, the 13th Street / 1st Avenue E intersection was identified as a high crash location. The curb extensions and raised intersection proposed at this location are intended to address these concerns. Prior to selecting raised intersections as the preferred treatment option for this location, there was discussion about converting this intersection from a two-way stop control (TWSC) to an all-way stop control (AWSC) intersection, however, the City decided to not pursue an AWSC at this location. Additionally, during the community engagement in January 2025, concern was expressed regarding vehicular speeding along the corridor, and the raised intersections at 13th Street and 12th Street are proposed to mitigate this concern by slowing vehicles along the corridor.  RRFB Locations: Similarly to Main Street, locations of the RRFBs were determined based on proximity to key destinations for pedestrians, as well as community feedback received during the development of the Main Street SAP (Reference 1).  11th Street AWSC Removal: The proposal to remove the AWSC at 11th Street is intended to provide consistency along the corridor as the rest of the corridor is free flowing. Based on the traffic volumes observed at this intersection, the AWSC is not needed operationally, and no safety concerns were identified during the safety evaluation at this location. Other proposed countermeasures are intended to address the concerns on vehicles speeding along the corridor. Removal of the AWSC is recommended in conjunction with the proposed raised intersections March 2025 Page | 18 and curb extensions; the AWSC should remain in place until these other improvements are installed. 1st Avenue West Similar to 1st Avenue East, 1st Avenue West was identified as a potential primary corridor for bicyclists within the downtown area, in addition to pedestrian safety improvements. As mentioned previously for 1st Avenue East, during the development of the concept design, the City and partner agencies decided to prioritize pedestrian safety improvements due to related roadway and funding constraints. This memorandum includes the work completed on bicycle facilities for the City and its partner agencies to revisit in the future. 1st Avenue West Design Elements The concept design for 1st Avenue West from Center Street to 12th Street includes the following modifications:  Remove dedicated left turn lanes on the minor approaches (east/west approaches) at the following locations: – 3rd Street W / 1st Avenue W – 4th Street W / 1st Avenue W  Install raised intersections at the following locations: – 2nd Street W / 1st Avenue W – 4th Avenue W / 1st Avenue W  Install RRFBs at the following locations: – 5th Street W / 1st Avenue W – 7th Street W / 1st Avenue W  Construct curb extensions at each corner of each intersection where appropriate  Install high-visibility crosswalks at each intersection  Install LPIs at all signalized intersections Figure 4 illustrate the typical cross sections of 1st Avenue W, which shows the general widths of each geometric element that is incorporated into the concept design. As mentioned previously, right-of-way linework provided for the concept design indicates varying widths of right-of-way along the 1st Avenue W corridor and does not consistently include areas such as the sidewalk or buffer spaces based on the aerial imagery. The concept design assumes there will be no impacts behind the existing back of sidewalk, but right-of-way impacts will need to be verified in future phasing of the project. C: \ U s e r s \ l k a n i e c k i \ a p p d a t a \ l o c a l \ t e m p \ A c P u b l i s h _ 2 8 9 8 4 \ 3 0 8 3 6 _ T y p i c a l S e c t i o n s . d w g M a r 1 1 , 2 0 2 5 - 4 : 4 1 p m - l k a n i e c k i L a y o u t T a b : F i g u r e 4 _ 1 s t A v e W T y p i c a l S e c t i o n s Typical Sections 1st Avenue W (Center Street W to 12th Street W) Kalispell, MT 4 Kalispell Main Street Safety Action Plan Concept Design March 2025 Figure March 2025 Page | 20 1st Avenue West Design Considerations Many of the concept design considerations summarized for the 1st Avenue E corridor also apply to the 1st Avenue W corridor, particularly for removal of left turn lanes on minor cross streets, location selections for raised intersections, and location selections for RRFBs. As such, the statements in the previous section apply for this corridor, and for brevity were not repeated in this section. Other Design Considerations The development of the concept designs sparked various discussions concerning additional design considerations, including bicycle facilities for the 1st Avenue corridors, connections to the existing pedestrian and bicycle network, winter maintenance, turn lane warrants, on-street parking, and access consolidation. This section provides additional details regarding each of these topics. Bicycle Facility Options on the 1st Avenue Corridors During the development of the Main Street SAP (Reference 1), the Kalispell community indicated a desire for north-south bicycle facilities downtown, not on Main Street, but along the 1st Avenue East and West corridors. Due to differing roadway widths, the 1st Avenues were separated into two sections, the northern section, and the southern section. To avoid unnecessary impacts to homes and business, all improvements along the two corridors were designed conceptually to remain within the existing right-of- way, avoiding impact to any areas behind the existing back of sidewalks. These principles guided the development of several options for providing bicycle facilities along the 1st Avenue corridors, which are provided in Attachment D. It is important to note that the 1st Avenue corridors do not necessarily need to have the same type of facilities on both corridors, and do not need to be implemented simultaneously to provide benefits to the Kalispell community. Connections to the Existing Active Transportation Network If the City and its planning partners opt to pursue bicycle facilities on the 1st Avenues in the future, connections to the existing bicycle and pedestrian network should be incorporated into the projects to facilitate a comprehensive active transportation system.  Parkline Trail: The Parkline Trail crosses 1st Avenue East, approximately 350’ north of Center Street. An on-street, buffered bike lane was initially included in the alternative concept designs for bicycle facilities to provide connectivity between the proposed concept design and the existing pathway, as shown in Attachment D. Connecting 1st Avenue W to the Parkline Trail may be dependent upon redevelopment of the site of the current Kalispell Mall. The concept design team discussed various options with the City for forging a connection between 1st Avenue W and the Parkline Trail, including connecting via Center Street to Main Street (see Attachment E), connecting directly through the existing mall parcel, and connecting via Center Street to 5th Avenue.  US 93 and Airport Road Bicycle Lanes: Bicycle ramps were included at the Main Street / 13th Street roundabout to provide a connection between the existing bike lanes on Main Street (south of 13th Street) and on Airport Road, which connects directly to 1st Avenue E, as displayed in Exhibit 10. March 2025 Page | 21 Exhibit 10. Roundabout Bicycle Ramps at Main Street / 13th Street Winter Maintenance The initial concept design for the 1st Avenue E and W corridors included removing the existing two-way center left turn lane and reallocating that space to wider pedestrian and bicycle facilities, which would have included wider sidewalks, raised bike lanes, and additional buffer space on both sides. The City expressed concerns about the method for snow removal and storage during the winter season under the initially proposed conditions. The City’s existing snow maintenance practices store snow in the two- way center turn lane along the 1st Avenue E & W corridors. With the proposed removal of the two-way center turn lane, various options were explored, including:  Storing snow in the on-street parking spaces and restricting on-street parking during specific times of the year, or  Storing snow in the bike lanes and buffer spaces along the sides of the road, behind the curbline. Ultimately, the City’s preference was to maintain the two-way center turn lane for ease of snow maintenance. Turn Lane Warrants As previously noted in the 1st Avenue East section, both 1st Avenue corridor concepts proposed removing turn lanes on minor street approaches at various locations. Intersection operations were evaluated at these intersections to determine if dedicated turn lanes were needed for their respective intersection to operate efficiently. Through the operations analysis, it was determined that all March 2025 Page | 22 intersections would operate acceptably with the proposed turn lane removals; the results are discussed in more detail in the Traffic Operations section. On-Street Parking As previously noted, there exists demand for parking within the downtown area. The City and the public have indicated a desire to maintain as much on-street vehicular parking as possible. To reduce the demand for on-street parking space in the future, the City could explore the development of a parking garage, or the publicizing of existing private surface lots. As shown in the proposed concept designs for Main Street, 1st Avenue W, and 1st Avenue E, parallel on-street parking is maintained on each corridor. Access Consolidation Access consolidation and access management along each corridor could provide additional safety benefits. Fewer driveways along a corridor reduce the potential conflicts between crossing pedestrians or bicyclists and vehicles turning in and out of those accesses. Fewer accesses can also reduce delays caused by vehicles slowing down to enter and exit accesses by encouraging drivers to utilize side street accesses. Additionally, consolidating driveways allows for the addition of on-street parking spaces; the space from the existing access can be repurposed as an additional parking space. The concept designs currently assume all accesses will remain as they are today, except for some minor driveway improvements needed for any of the proposed roadway elements. The City will discuss any access consolidation and management with property and business owners prior to any changes, in order to better understand business’ needs and concerns in regard to access and deliveries to their business or property. Traffic Operations The traffic analysis performed as part of Phase 2 included an evaluation of intersection operations under peak summer conditions during the weekday AM and weekday PM peak hours for the existing year 2024 and future year 2045. The analysis included a “No Build” scenario which evaluated intersections under existing conditions and a “Build” scenario which evaluated intersections with the recommended improvements as described in the previous sections. The intersections analyzed as part of Phase 2 include:  Main Street – Idaho Street (US 2) / Main Street – Center Street / Main Street – 1st Street / Main Street – 2nd Street / Main Street – 3rd Street / Main Street – 4th Street / Main Street – 5th Street / Main Street – 6th Street / Main Street – 7th Street / Main Street – 10th Street / Main Street – 11th Street / Main Street – 12th Street / Main Street – 13th Street / Airport Road / Main Street  1st Avenue E – Center Street / 1st Avenue E – 1st Street / 1st Avenue E – 2nd Street / 1st Avenue E – 3rd Street / 1st Avenue E March 2025 Page | 23 – 4th Street / 1st Avenue E – 5th Street / 1st Avenue E – 12th Street / 1st Avenue E – 13th Street / 1st Avenue E  1st Avenue W – Center Street / 1st Avenue W – 1st Street / 1st Avenue W – 2nd Street / 1st Avenue W – 3rd Street / 1st Avenue W – 4th Street / 1st Avenue W – 5th Street / 1st Avenue W The following sections summarize the methodology employed in the analysis and the results of the operations analysis, including an overview of key metrics such as level of service (LOS), volume-to- capacity (V/C) for the critical movement, and projected queue lengths for the critical movement. Methodology For Main Street, the traffic analysis utilized LOS C as the minimum capacity threshold, as is consistent with the standards presented in the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) Traffic Engineering Manual (Reference 4). For 1st Avenue East and 1st Avenue West, the traffic analysis utilized LOS D as the minimum capacity threshold, as is consistent with the standards presented in the MDT Traffic Engineering Manual (Reference 4), as well as the threshold utilized in the most recent citywide transportation plan (Reference 5). These thresholds are based on the respective functional classifications of the roadways. The traffic analysis utilized methodologies from the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 7th Edition (Reference 7) and HCM 2000 Edition (Reference 8), which is included in the Synchro 12 software used for this analysis. Sidra 9 software was used to conduct operational analyses for roundabouts. Traffic Volumes Turning movement and multimodal counts were collected at 21 intersections along Main Street, 1st Avenue East, and 1st Avenue West in August 2024 to understand and evaluate peak summertime traffic conditions. Counts were taken during the weekday morning time period (7:00 AM-9:00 AM) and during the weekday evening time period (4:00 PM-6:00 PM). System peak hours of 7:50 AM-8:50 AM and 4:35 PM-5:35 PM were identified for the weekday AM and weekday PM peak hours, respectively. Attachment F provides the August 2024 traffic counts used for this analysis. The counts collected in August 2024 were compared to those collected in January 2024 for the Kalispell Main Street SAP. Five intersections were counted during both Phases:  Idaho Street (US 2) / Main Street  Center Street / Main Street  2nd Street / Main Street  12th Street / Main Street  13th Street / Main Street Weekday PM peak hour volumes at these intersections were higher in August 2024 than in January 2024, even when the peak hour was adjusted to align with the January counts. On average, August weekday PM peak volumes were about 10% higher than January weekday PM peak hour volumes. August weekday AM peak hour volumes were lower than January weekday AM peak hour volumes; depending on the intersection, volumes were 8% to 30% higher in January. This disparity is likely related to school activity, given the proximity of multiple schools to Main Street. March 2025 Page | 24 For the Kalispell Main Street SAP, January 2024 counts were adjusted upwards to approximate the peak season, per MDT guidance. Those seasonally adjusted counts were ultimately higher than the counts collected in August 2024 – in both the weekday AM and weekday PM time periods. Therefore, the previous SAP traffic operations analysis completed as part of Phase 1 was conservative in the projected traffic volumes, and therefore the traffic analysis results included in the SAP. The latest August 2024 counts were used for the traffic analysis in Phase 2, and these counts were not seasonally adjusted as they were collected in the peak summer month. Individual intersection peak hour factors were used. Traffic Control Warrants Signalized and all-way stop control (AWSC) intersections along 1st Avenue E and 1st Avenue W were assessed to see if they currently meet, or are expected to meet, volume-based AWSC or signal warrants. Table 1 summarizes the findings from the AWSC and traffic signal warrant analysis. Attachment G contains signal and AWSC warrants. Table 1. Traffic Control Warrant Summary Intersection AWSC Warranted? Signal Warranted? Year 2024 Year 2045 Year 2024 Year 2045 1st Avenue W 1st Avenue W / Center Street Yes Yes Yes Yes 1st Avenue W / 2nd Street W Yes Yes No No 1st Avenue W / 4th Street W No No No No 1st Avenue E 1st Avenue E / Center Street Yes Yes No Yes 1st Avenue E / 2nd Street E Yes Yes No Yes 1st Avenue E / 4th Street E No No No No 1st Avenue E / 11th Street E1 No No No No 1st Avenue E / 12th Street E No - - - 1st Avenue E / 13th St E No - - - 1 Counts were not collected at this intersection but were developed using volumes at adjacent intersections. Only 1st Avenue W / Center Street was found to meet signal warrants under existing conditions. Through discussions with the City, however, it was determined that no traffic signals were to be removed on the 1st Avenues. It is important to note that for intersections where AWSC is a warranted traffic control under 2024 conditions, it was assumed that the traffic control would also be warranted under 2045 conditions. Similarly, it was assumed that at intersections where a signal is warranted under 2024 conditions, that it would also be warranted under 2045 conditions. March 2025 Page | 25 Traffic Analysis Results The following sections outline the results of the traffic operations analysis. Existing Year 2024 Analysis This section provides an overview of traffic operations assuming existing year 2024 traffic volumes. The analysis compares operations of study intersections under the No Build scenario, which assumes conditions remain the same as they are today and there are no changes to existing lane configurations or traffic controls, and under the Build scenario, which assumes the proposed treatments described in previous sections are in place. These treatments include lane configuration changes, traffic control changes, and signal timing adjustments to incorporate LPIs at all signalized intersections. The existing year 2024 traffic analysis utilized the existing traffic counts collected in August 2024 as described in the previous section. Table 2 presents the intersection LOS and V/C ratio for each study intersection, or its respective critical movement, during the weekday AM and weekday PM peak hours under existing year 2024 conditions for the No Build and Build scenarios. Intersections meeting or exceeding the thresholds discussed in the Methodology section are bolded and highlighted. Table 2. Intersection Operation Results – Existing Year 2024 Conditions (No Build & Build) Intersection Existing Year 2024 (No Build) Existing Year 2024 (Build) Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour LOS V/C1 LOS V/C1 LOS V/C1 LOS V/C1 Main Street Main St / Idaho St C 0.59 D 0.88 C 0.59 D 0.88 Main St / Center St B 0.38 B 0.59 C 0.58 D 0.91 Main St / 1st St A 0.22 A 0.33 B 0.50 C 0.72 Main St / 2nd St A 0.28 A 0.43 B 0.52 C 0.77 Main St / 3rd St A 0.25 A 0.37 C 0.48 C 0.70 Main St / 4th St A 0.23 B 0.34 B 0.44 C 0.62 Main St / 5th St C (EB) 0.10 D (EB) 0.14 C (EB) 0.12 E (EB) 0.19 Main St / 6th St A 0.24 A 0.32 B 0.53 A 0.60 Main St / 7th St B (WB) 0.02 B (WB) 0.04 B (WB) 0.02 B (WB) 0.05 Main St / 10th St B (EB) 0.05 D (EB) 0.17 B (EB) 0.05 D (EB) 0.17 Main St / 11th St A 0.41 B 0.66 A 0.36 A 0.59 Main St / 12th St D (WBL) 0.01 F (WBL) 0.05 B (WB) 0.07 C (EB) 0.10 Main St / 13th St C (EBL) 0.15 E (EBL) 0.27 A 0.34 A 0.58 1st Avenue E 1st Ave E / Center St A 0.23 C 0.45 A 0.27 C 0.47 1st Ave E / 1st St B (EB) 0.04 B (EB) 0.11 B (EB) 0.04 B (EB) 0.12 1st Ave E / 2nd St B 0.21 A 0.35 B 0.22 B 0.37 March 2025 Page | 26 1 Results presented are for the critical movement. As shown, all intersections along 1st Avenue E and W operate within the desired threshold today. Note, the side streets along 1st Avenue E and W were modeled with single-lane shared approaches (i.e. any dedicated left turn lanes were removed from the analysis). Left turn volumes are currently low (<10 left turns at most intersections, and between 10-40 left turns at some intersections) and are not expected to grow significantly under future conditions. As such, the intersections are expected to operate acceptably without these dedicated turn lanes. On Main Street, all intersections operate within the operational thresholds except for the following intersections:  Main Street / Idaho Street  Main Street / Center Street  Main Street / 5th Street  Main Street / 10th Street  Main Street / 12th Street  Main Street / 13th Street The proposed RIRO treatment at the 12th Street intersection and the proposed roundabout at 13th Street intersections improve operations significantly. The left turns at 12th Street are expected to re- route to 11th Street and 13th Street intersections under the build scenario. As part of the concept design process, a small geometric change to the 13th Street roundabout was made from Phase 1 to Phase 2, as this traffic analysis determined thaty a dedicated southbound right-turn lane would not materially improve intersection operations at Main Street / 13th Street-Airport Road. Furthermore, by removing the southbound right-turn lane, conflicts and crossing distances are reduced for pedestrians and bicyclists. Intersection Existing Year 2024 (No Build) Existing Year 2024 (Build) Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour LOS V/C1 LOS V/C1 LOS V/C1 LOS V/C1 1st Ave E / 3rd St B (EB) 0.01 C (EB) 0.05 B (EB) 0.04 B (EB) 0.12 1st Ave E / 4th St B 0.14 A 0.21 B 0.15 B 0.25 1st Ave E / 5th St B (EB) 0.02 B (EB) 0.02 B (EB) 0.05 B (EB) 0.07 1st Ave E / 12th St A (EB) 0.02 B (EB) 0.03 A (EB) 0.02 B (EB) 0.03 1st Ave E / 13th St B (EB) 0.04 B (WB) 0.07 B (EB) 0.04 B (WB) 0.07 1st Avenue W 1st Ave W / Center St B 0.25 C 0.42 B 0.28 C 0.45 1st Ave W / 1st St A (EB) 0.03 B (EB) 0.04 A (EB) 0.03 B (EB) 0.04 1st Ave W / 2nd St B 0.19 B 0.36 B 0.20 B 0.38 1st Ave W / 3rd St B (EBL) 0.02 B (EBL) 0.01 B (EB) 0.07 B (WB) 0.06 1st Ave W / 4th St B 0.16 B 0.19 B 0.18 B 0.21 1st Ave W / 5th St B (EB) 0.05 B (EB) 0.05 B (EB) 0.05 B (EB) 0.05 March 2025 Page | 27 The 5th Street and 10th Street intersections are unsignalized today, and as reported in Table 2, the critical movements are all minor street movements. Despite these results, both these intersections still operate well under capacity, indicating drivers are able to find gaps within traffic to make their desired maneuver. The Main Street / Idaho Street intersection operates below the desired threshold today under the existing lane configurations. However, the operational needs at this intersection are not triggered by the proposed concept design, and as such, are outside the scope of this project. Operations at the Main Street / Center Street intersection worsen under the Build scenario compared to the No Build scenario due to the removal of a through lane in each direction. Although operations are anticipated to worsen, the proposed treatments are intended to reduce the number of high severity crashes, thus increasing safety along the corridor. Figure 5 and Figure 6 illustrate the overall intersection LOS for each study intersection during weekday AM and weekday PM peak hours under existing year 2024 No Build conditions and the existing year 2024 Build conditions. Attachment H contains the Synchro operational worksheets for existing year 2024, No Build scenario. Attachment I contains the Synchro operational worksheets for the existing year 2024, Build scenario. March 2025 Page | 28 Figure 5. Existing Year 2024 Traffic Operations (No Build) Weekday AM and PM Peak Hours March 2025 Page | 29 Figure 6. Existing Year 2024 Traffic Operations (Build) Weekday AM and PM Peak Hour March 2025 Page | 30 Future Year 2045 Analysis This section provides an overview of traffic operations assuming future year 2045 traffic volumes. The future conditions analysis used 2045 as the study horizon year to ensure consistency with the traffic analysis completed as part of Phase 1 of the Main Street Safety Action Plan. Existing 2024 traffic volumes were grown at a compounding annual growth rate of 1% to approximate future 2045 volumes. The growth rate was only applied to vehicle volumes, not multimodal volumes. All intersections were analyzed using a peak hour factor of 1.00. The analysis compares operations of study intersections under the No Build scenario, which assumes conditions remain the same as they are today and there are no changes to existing lane configurations or traffic controls, and under the Build scenario, which assumes the proposed treatments described in previous sections are in place. These treatments include lane configuration changes, traffic control changes, and signal timing adjustments to incorporate LPIs at all signalized intersections. Table 3 presents the intersection LOS and V/C ratio for each study intersection, or its respective critical movement, during the weekday AM and weekday PM peak hours under future year 2045 conditions for the No Build and Build scenarios. Intersections meeting or exceeding the thresholds discussed in the Methodology section are bolded and highlighted. Table 3. Intersection Operation Results – Future Year 2045 Conditions (No Build & Build) Intersection Future Year 2045 (No Build) Future Year 2045 (Build) Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour LOS V/C1 LOS V/C1 LOS V/C1 LOS V/C1 Main Street Main St / Idaho St C 0.70 D 1.14 C 0.70 D 1.14 Main St / Center St B 0.42 B 0.66 C 0.64 E 0.99 Main St / 1st St A 0.26 A 0.38 A 0.57 B 0.81 Main St / 2nd St A 0.33 B 0.51 B 0.61 E 0.90 Main St / 3rd St A 0.28 A 0.40 C 0.54 D 0.77 Main St / 4th St A 0.28 A 0.40 C 0.52 C 0.72 Main St / 5th St C (EB) 0.12 E (EB) 0.20 C (EB) 0.15 F (EB) 0.29 Main St / 6th St A 0.27 A 0.35 B 0.56 B 0.67 Main St / 7th St B (WB) 0.02 B (WB) 0.04 B (WB) 0.03 B (WB) 0.07 Main St / 10th St C (EB) 0.06 E (EB) 0.25 C (EB) 0.06 E (EB) 0.25 Main St / 11th St A 0.46 B 0.78 A 0.45 A 0.77 Main St / 12th St D (WBL) 0.03 F (WBL) 0.11 B (WB) 0.09 C (WB) 0.15 Main St / 13th St C (EBL) 0.18 F (EBL) 0.49 A 0.42 A 0.71 1st Avenue E 1st Ave E / Center St A 0.24 C 0.43 A 0.27 C 0.45 1st Ave E / 1st St B (EB) 0.04 B (EB) 0.10 B (EB) 0.04 B (EB) 0.11 March 2025 Page | 31 1 Results presented are for the critical movement. The results shown under future year 2045 conditions are similar to those of existing year 2024. All intersections along the 1st Avenue corridors are projected to continue to operate acceptably under both the No Build and Build conditions. Again, the side streets along the 1st Avenue E and W corridors were modeled with single-lane shared approaches and as shown in the table above, the intersections are expected to operate acceptably without these dedicated turn lanes even with future year 2045 traffic volumes. All intersections projected to exceed the desired LOS thresholds under existing conditions remain the same with the addition of the following intersections:  Main Street / 2nd Street  Main Street / 3rd Street As noted previously, the increased queuing and delays at these intersections are trade-offs for improving safety along the corridor. Although the resulting LOS Ds and Es at some intersections may cause some minor increased congestion, drivers are expected to experience a constantly moving queue, albeit slow, that will still progress along the corridor during the peak hour, rather than being completely stopped for long durations. While increased congestion may slow vehicles down and increase travel time by a minimal amount, it will also reduce the risk of high-severity crashes. Additionally, the future volume projections used for this analysis do not account for any traffic re-routing that would occur with the development of the Bypass, which is a more conservative approach for this analysis. Regional trips that primarily use Main Street as a thoroughfare today are expected to utilize the US-93 Bypass once the ultimate configurations have been implemented; Main Street will primarily serve local traffic for accessing the surrounding residential and commercial/business areas. Intersection Future Year 2045 (No Build) Future Year 2045 (Build) Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour LOS V/C1 LOS V/C1 LOS V/C1 LOS V/C1 1st Ave E / 2nd St B 0.21 A 0.34 B 0.22 B 0.36 1st Ave E / 3rd St B (EB) 0.01 C (EB) 0.05 B (EB) 0.04 B (EB) 0.11 1st Ave E / 4th St B 0.15 A 0.21 B 0.17 B 0.24 1st Ave E / 5th St B (EB) 0.02 B (EB) 0.02 B (EB) 0.05 B (EB) 0.07 1st Ave E / 12th St A (EB) 0.02 B (EB) 0.03 A (EB) 0.02 B (EB) 0.03 1st Ave E / 13th St B (EB) 0.03 B (WB) 0.08 B (EB) 0.03 B (WB) 0.08 1st Avenue W 1st Ave W / Center St B 0.27 C 0.41 B 0.30 C 0.44 1st Ave W / 1st St A (EB) 0.03 B (EB) 0.05 A (EB) 0.03 B (EB) 0.05 1st Ave W / 2nd St B 0.20 B 0.37 B 0.21 B 0.38 1st Ave W / 3rd St B (EBL) 0.02 B (EBL) 0.01 B (EB) 0.08 B (WB) 0.07 1st Ave W / 4th St B 0.16 B 0.20 B 0.18 B 0.22 1st Ave W / 5th St B (EB) 0.05 B (EB) 0.04 B (EB) 0.05 B (WB) 0.04 March 2025 Page | 32 Another corridor-wide improvement for Main Street is the installation of the center left-turn lane. Currently, left turns off of Main Street at certain intersections are restricted during daytime hours. This restriction is intended to nullify the impact of delays that left turns may cause for other movements, as the left turns are currently made from shared through-left lanes during the unrestricted hours. However, as mentioned in the Main Street section, the concept design adds left turn lanes on Main Street to these intersections. Therefore, left turn phases were incorporated into the signal timing at these intersections. Although an assessment of future volumes revealed that volumes were not high enough to recommend protected-permissive phasing per NCHRP guidance (Reference 9), protected- permissive phasing for left turns was assumed because of the safety implications associated with LPIs and permissive left turns. Permissive-only phasing would likely lead to limited gaps for left turning vehicles which, in turn, could lead to lower gap acceptance and conflicts with pedestrians. Figure 7 and Figure 8 illustrate the overall intersection LOS for each study intersection during weekday AM and weekday PM peak hours under future year 2045 No Build and Build conditions, respectively. Attachment J contains the Synchro operational worksheets for the future year 2045, No Build scenario. Attachment K contains the Synchro operational worksheets for the future year 2045, Build scenario. March 2025 Page | 33 Figure 7. Future Year 2045 Traffic Operations (No Build) Weekday AM and PM Peak Hour March 2025 Page | 34 Figure 8. Future Year 2045 Traffic Operations (Build) Weekday AM and PM Peak Hour March 2025 Page | 35 Travel Time A travel time analysis estimates the time required to travel from one end of the study corridor to the other during peak conditions. Northbound travel and southbound travel are assessed separately. Travel times are composed of running time (the amount of time it takes to travel a segment) and control delay time (delays associated with traffic signals and roundabouts). Estimated travel times for Main Street for each scenario and direction are summarized in Table 4. Detailed travel time reports for Main Street are provided in Attachment L. As demonstrated in the table below, while travel time is projected to increase under build conditions for both the existing 2024 and future 2045 scenarios, the change in travel time is less than two minutes to traverse the corridor, resulting in a negligible change from current conditions. Table 4. Estimated Peak Travel Times for Main Street Queues Queue lengths are estimated in multiples of 25 feet, which is taken to be the length of an average vehicle; that is, a queue length of 125 feet can be assumed to be five vehicles long. Queues are also viewed through the 95th-percentile lens, meaning that these results describe a queue that can be expected during 5% of the analysis period. Queues are typically compared to the available storage lengths to understand if queues may spill out into other travel streams during peak times. For through movements on a three-lane cross section (as is proposed in the Build scenario here), the storage length is the length of one block – approximately 300 feet in Downtown Kalispell. Queues can be visualized using a Time-Space Diagram (TSD). Time is shown on the x-axis, with space along a corridor shown on the y-axis. Put simply, straight vertical lines indicate unimpeded free-flow traffic, while squiggly lines indicate queue buildup and straight horizontal lines indicate stopped queues. In the case below, red lines represent northbound vehicles and blue lines represent southbound vehicles on Main Street. Traffic signal cycles are indicated by the green, yellow, and red time bars at each intersection. TSDs for Idaho Street to 4th Street under the Build scenarios at 90th-percentile flows are shown for the Build conditions in 2024 and 2045 for the AM and PM peak hours in Exhibit 11, Exhibit 12, Exhibit 13, and Exhibit 14. Scenario Travel Time (seconds) Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour NB SB NB SB Year 2024 No Build 314.0 294.7 331.6 322.1 Build 354.4 324.8 389.1 360.8 Change in Travel Time +40.4 +29.7 +57.5 +37.5 Year 2045 No Build 319.0 299.4 346.1 340.7 Build 358.0 325.6 430.8 430.5 Change in Travel Time +39.0 +26.2 +84.7 +89.8 March 2025 Page | 36 Exhibit 11. Time-Space Diagram for 2024 Build AM Peak Hour Conditions March 2025 Page | 37 Exhibit 12. Time-Space Diagram for 2024 Build PM Peak Hour Conditions March 2025 Page | 38 Exhibit 13. Time-Space Diagram for 2045 Build AM Peak Hour Conditions March 2025 Page | 39 Exhibit 14. Time-Space Diagram for 2045 Build PM Peak Hour Conditions March 2025 Page | 40 Under existing conditions, analysis queues are distributed across two lanes; during times of unrestricted left turns, these impediments may not be captured. During the existing weekday PM peak hour (the period with highest traffic volumes), southbound travel along Main Street is fairly free-flow in the 90th percentile, with some queueing at the 4th Street signal. Northbound travel is unimpeded along segments, but some queueing exists, particularly at the intersections from 2nd Street to Idaho Street. Under future year 2045 No Build conditions, queues are combined into a single through lane – although left turns are now siphoned into dedicated turn lanes. There is some queue buildup in the southbound direction at the Center Street signal. Northbound queues lengthen at 2nd Street, Center Street, and Idaho Street; however, queues are still generally less than half a block. The future year 2045 Build conditions exhibit slightly more congestion in the southbound direction during the PM peak hour. However, queues are not projected to be at a standstill; rather, vehicles are shown to move along the corridor in a “moving queue”, or platoon. Some queuing at the Center Street signal is expected, but it does not extend to the Parkline Trail. Northbound travel is expected to experience longer queues, particularly at 4th Street, Center Street, and Idaho Street; at Idaho Street (northbound) and Center Street (southbound), queues may occasionally extend to the Parkline Trail during peak times. Queues at Idaho Street will likely continue to grow without capacity improvements, which are outside the scope of this project. It is important to note that travel time and queue impacts are not entirely driven by the lane reductions; in many locations along the corridor there is excess existing capacity to reduce the cross section. The LPIs modeled under the Build scenarios contribute to both the travel time and queue length increases. LPIs allocate dedicated time to pedestrians at the signals along the corridor and so will lengthen travel times and queues by corresponding amounts. However, in an urban environment, these mild increases in queuing are acceptable, as they are traded for an increase in safety for people walking and people driving. With that in mind, the queue analysis (and the travel time analysis discussed in the previous section) reflects slower travel speeds for vehicles through Downtown Kalispell. This is expected to improve the experience for other users along and crossing the corridor, in addition to reducing noise pollution, a concern for Kalispell community members, especially local business owners. As this is a safety-focused project, these benefits may outweigh increased queue lengths and travel times. Queueing issues may also be attenuated with appropriate and effective signal timing. Existing offsets were carried through to the future year analyses, although signal timing study will be needed to further optimize the signal system along the corridor. Lastly, through volumes are expected to more strongly favor the US 93 Bypass, meaning some diversion will be expected in future years. Safety Benefits Throughout the development of the Kalispell SAP, priority corridors were identified for addressing safety concerns and implementing various treatments to improve safety. As part of the Kalispell SAP, Main Street, which accounted for 21% of all serious injury crashes within the Kalispell Planning Area (Reference 1), was identified as one of those high priority locations. The vision for the Main Street SAP is to “apply the Safe System Approach to eliminate fatal and serious injury crashes and reduce crash risk along the Main Street corridor to promote safe, livable, and connected communities for all users of the transportation system over the 20-year horizon (by 2045)”. Implementing the proposed treatments addresses the safety concerns identified in the Kalispell SAP and promotes greater connectivity and access, especially for vulnerable road users, thus meeting the goals of the Main Street SAP. March 2025 Page | 41 Environmental This section highlights the key findings of the environmental evaluation for this project. More details about the environmental analysis are provided in Attachment M. The environmental review focused on the following topics:  Land Ownership  Geologic Resources & Hazards  Soil Resources / Farmland  Hazardous Substances / Sources  Air Quality  Hydrology  Wetlands  Biological Resources  Social and Cultural Resources Regarding hazardous substances, the evaluation identified 15 petroleum releases (5 open, 10 resolved), 12 regulated underground storage tank (four (4) permanently out of use or removed from the ground, and eight (8) currently in use), and one (1) Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) small quantity generator (closed) on Main Street. The eight (8) underground storage tanks include gasoline, diesel, and dyed diesel. On 1st Avenue E and W, the evaluation identified nine (9) petroleum releases, all of which are resolved, and three (3) regulated underground storage tanks, which are currently in use and include gasoline and diesel. Note that additional investigation may be required as part of the final design process, based on the scope of the proposed improvements. In terms of air quality, Kalispell falls within a “non-attainment” area for PM10, which means necessitates the City and its partner agencies take measures to reduce the amount of this type of pollution over time, in accordance with federal law. As part of the final design process, a determination of whether the project is subject to National Ambient Air Quality Standards conformity requirements of Mobile Source Air Toxic Analysis is necessary. The groundwater levels within the project limits are generally high (less than 10 feet) and potential impacts to groundwater will need to be considered as part of the final design process. Additionally, the public water supply well is located at the Flathead County Justice Center. Nineteen noxious weed species were documented within two (2) miles of the project area, which will require reviews prior to any ground disturbance and coordination with Flathead County Weed District. Applicable best management practices as outlined in the MDT Standard Specifications and Flathead County’s Weed Management Plan should be implemented as appropriate. Several endangered species were identified in the area, including:  Canada Lynx  Grizzly Bear  North American Wolverine  Yellow-billed Cuckoo  Bull Trout In addition to these species, the Monarch Butterfly was recently nominated as a candidate to become an endangered species and resides within the area. The improvements moving forward must undergo further review for compliance with the provisions of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). As the listing status of species and critical habitats can change over time, this list of affected species and critical habitats must be re-evaluated for the project during the final design process. Additionally, the habitats near the proposed project areas must be evaluated to determine the suitability for species of concern March 2025 Page | 42 (SOC) and special status species (SSS). The evaluation will assist in identifying measures to avoid or minimize the impacts to these species and their habitats during project implementation. The economics evaluation revealed that approximately 22.6% of the surrounding population is below the poverty line, which is higher than the 9.7% within Flathead County overall. The median household income of approximately $33K is less than half of that of Flathead County (approximately $74K). Given this information, the project must consider impacts on the neighborhood and community as well as growth and development that may be induced by the recommended transportation improvements. Section 4(f) of the US Department of Transportation Act of 1966 requires the consideration of park and recreation lands, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and historic sites during transportation project development (Reference 10). Parcels that are designated as Section 4(f) include: the Parkline Trail, Depot Park, Courthouse Park, in addition to cultural resources. In the final design process, an evaluation of any potential “uses” (i.e. when land is permanently incorporated into a transportation project or permanently impaired by the impacts of a project) of these parcels must be completed to designate the project as a “de minimus” impact, which certifies that the project will not adversely affect the activities, features, or attributes of the Section 4(f) parcel. As the concept designs developed as part of Phase 2 aim to enhance the accessibility and connectivity of these resources, a “de minimus” impact is likely. There are several historical districts within the project area that must be considered for this project which include Main Street, Main Street Addendum, the Courthouse, and the East Side. As stated in Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), federal agencies must determine methods to avoid or minimize any adverse effects the project might have on eligible historical properties and consult with the State Historic Preservation Office or Tribal Historic Preservation Office. The notable historical buildings in the project area include:  Main Street – Heller Building – Anderson Style Shop – O’Neil Lumber Company Office – Sauser-Mercord Building  1st Avenue E & 1st Avenue W – City Water Department – Continental Oil Company Filling Station – Federal building – Flathead Wholesale Grocery – Great Northern Railway Depot – Hotel Norden – Kalispell – American Laundry – Kalispell Monumental Company – Walker House – Brice Apartments Additionally, there are multiple additional eligible or undetermined historical properties, particularly on the 1st Avenue E and W corridors. March 2025 Page | 43 Hydraulics As part of the concept designs, a planning-level hydraulic analysis was conducted to identify any existing drainage issues and potential improvements that can be incorporated into the final design of the corridors. A more detailed analysis is documented and provided in Attachment N. The evaluation revealed that a majority of the project area drains to the 1st Avenue W trunkline (36-inch diameter). The stormwater that discharges at the AC6 outfall is currently treated by one (1) of two (2) offline hydrodynamic separators. It should be noted that an update to the stormwater city wide system model is in progress, which is used to identify the downstream capacity limitations. The Main Street / 11th Street area, which is a known drainage area identified by the City and through this analysis, may require new inlets and pipe. Two potential options for improving this area are as follows:  Connect to MDT’s trunkline (18-inch diameter): Would allow the system to stay within MDT owned facilities and may require upsizing of the existing pipe.  Connect to 1st Avenue W trunkline (36-inch diameter): Would have larger capacity and connect MDT and City owned facilities. Exhibit 15 illustrates a map of the drainage system around the southern terminus of Main Street and the potential improvements listed above. Exhibit 15. Main Street Drainage Mapping For the 1st Avenue E & W corridors, all drainage work is located in the Ashley Creek AC6 basin, and two (2) hydrodynamic separators cover the entire project area. No known drainage issues were identified on either the 1st Avenue E or W corridor; the improvements are anticipated to be limited to relocating inlets to new curb and the pipe segment on 1st Avenue E from 12th Street to 13th Street. The primary trunkline of the project area is located on 1st Avenue W, where most of the water drains as March 2025 Page | 44 mentioned above. Although no known issues were identified on these corridors, there are opportunities for subsurface storage or infiltration low impact development (LiD) if downstream capacity is limited. Estimated costs for these improvements are provided in the cost estimate should the City be interested in pursuing these options. However, the costs for the LiDs are not included in the overall concept design cost estimates as they are only recommendations and not required treatments to maintain the system. Community Engagement In January 2025, a series of community engagement events were held in downtown Kalispell to inform community members about Phase 2 and solicit feedback on the concept designs. Three pop-up events at different community locations were held on January 28th, resulting in 20+ interactions with community members. On January 29th, three community meetings were held at Kalispell City Hall to facilitate dialogue with business and property owners, resulting in 15+ interactions with community members. Participating businesses included: Wheat Montana, Wheaton’s Bicycles, Kalispell Grand Hotel, Insty Prints, ImagineIF Library, Stockman Bank, Elks Club, Jobs Service, Glacier Bank, and a Main St Salon. On January 30th, an Open House was held at Kalispell City Hall for all community members to participate in an interactive review of the concept designs, which resulted in 30+ participants. Photos from the January 2025 community engagement events are displayed in Exhibit 16. The community engagement events were advertised through several outreach methods, including a media release, direct mailers to homes and businesses in Kalispell, digital ads, and radio ads. Additionally, “takeaway cards” were dropped off at businesses along the Main Street, 1st Avenue E, and 1st Avenue W corridors in the week leading up to the in-person events, and an email was sent on January 14, 2025 to the project’s contact database, which included Project Advisory Committee members from Phase 1, as well as community members who had signed up for email updates in Phase 1. The media release was shared on January 13, 2025. The social media ads ran on Facebook and Instagram between January 16 – February 7, 2025. The radio ads were broadcasted between January 16 – January 30, 2025. The direct mailers (7,500 total) were sent on January 20, 2025. Engagement materials are available in Attachment O. In addition to these in-person events, there were several online opportunities to learn about the concept designs and provide input. The project website, www.MainStreetKalispellSafetyPlan.com was updated to provide information about Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the project, with contact information and a public comment portal available for community members to submit questions and comments. The project StoryMap, was similarly updated to reflect information about Phase 2, including photo renderings and information about the project corridors. To facilitate a virtual experience that replicated the interactive review of the concept designs that was available during the Open House, a Concept Board was created that included images of the Open House display boards, as well as a digital version of the concept designs, with the option to post virtual sticky notes on the concept design drawings (as shown in Exhibit 17). The Concept Board was available for public use between January 24 – February 7, 2025. Through the in-person and digital engagement opportunities, over 100 comments were received on the Phase 2 concept designs from Kalispell community members. As discussed in previous sections, the sentiments expressed by the Kalispell community informed several concept design decisions. March 2025 Page | 45 Exhibit 16. Photos from January 2025 Community Engagement Events March 2025 Page | 46 Exhibit 17. Online, Interactive "Concept Board" for Virtual Community Engagement Several key themes emerged from the community engagement events, which are outlined below:  The Pop-Up Events on January 28th, 2025, revealed the following themes: – Balancing modes across the downtown corridors is crucial to keep Kalispell moving. – Accessibility is critical for redesigning the 1st Avenues. – Bicycle facilities that are safe for families should be the goal for the 1st Avenue corridors.  Along the Main Street corridor, business and property owners expressed: – Support for wayfinding signage to direct drivers onto the Bypass, landscaping (especially trees) over hardscaping, and enhancing walkability downtown. – Concerns about heavy vehicle and emergency vehicle access, funding public amenities along the corridor, funding construction, and queues during peak times  Along the 1st Avenue corridors, business and property owners expressed: – Support for bike lanes and landscaping (especially trees) – Concerns about pedestrian/bicycle conflicts, narrow sidewalks, and vehicular speeding  Along the Main Street corridor, Kalispell community members expressed: – Support for wider parking near St Matthew’s School, roundabouts, public amenities, enhanced walkability downtown, vehicle-generated noise reduction, and landscaping (especially trees) – Concerns about emergency vehicle access, wayfinding signage to direct drivers to the Bypass, and queues during peak times  Along the 1st Avenue corridors, Kalispell community members expressed: March 2025 Page | 47 – Support for bike lanes, connections to the Parkline Trail, and landscaping (especially trees) – Concerns about snow maintenance for bike lanes, vehicular speeding, narrow sidewalks, and pedestrian/bicycle conflicts Cost Estimate Concept level cost estimates were developed for each corridor and calculated using estimated quantities and unit costs. Unit cost assumptions from the SAP were evaluated and updated based on recent local projects of similar size and context, MDT’s 2024 Bid Item Report (Reference 10), as well as recent cost estimates for project examples in locations of similar context (i.e., Oregon). Table 5 presents the concept level cost estimates for the improvements proposed for each corridor as shown in Attachment A. Details of the cost estimates are provided in Attachment P. These concept- level cost estimates are intended to assist the City of Kalispell and its partner agencies in determining and pursuing opportunities for grant funding for the design and construction of the projects. It is important to note that the cost estimates for these projects will be further refined in future final design phases. These cost estimates are inclusive of the treatments discussed for each corridor in their respective Concept Designs section. Table 5. Concept Design Cost Estimates Corridor Concept Design Cost Estimate Main Street $26.8M 1st Avenue E $10.6M 1st Avenue W $8.3M Total $45.7M SS4A Implementation Grant Funding The intention of Phase 2 was to assist the City of Kalispell and its partner agencies in preparing a competitive application for Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Implementation grant funding. This program, authorized by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021, stipulates several requirements for implementation activities, including a local funding match of 80% federal / 20% local. This local funding match may be provided by local sources, state sources, or private sources, but in most cases may not utilize other federal funds as the local match source (such as Community Development Block Grants). In years past, the maximum grant award was $25 million for implementation grants, but this figure may change for the FY2025 Notice of Funding Opportunity. With these requirements in mind, the Project Management Team for this project discussed the priorities for grant funding at the PMT #3 meetings held on January 31st and February 7th, 2025. During these “I think it would be much better for the local economy if downtown were more walkable…right now it’s not pleasant.” - Kalispell resident of 17 years March 2025 Page | 48 meetings, PMT members discussed the need to balance the priorities of the community (received during the three rounds of engagement throughout Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the project) and the long- term vision and funding priorities of the City and its partner agencies, with the concept design-level cost estimates produced as part of Phase 2 and the constraints imposed by the available grant funding opportunities. Overwhelmingly, the Kalispell community voiced their support for revitalizing downtown through the implementation of the Main Street roadway reallocation with a focus on enhancing walkability and pedestrian safety, in alignment with the vision outlined in both the City of Kalispell’s 2017 Growth Policy (Reference 12), as well as the 2021 Transportation Master Plan (Reference 5). While there was support voiced for the provision of bicycle facilities on the 1st Avenue corridors, the Kalispell community did not want to prioritize creating bicycle facilities at the expense of pedestrian facilities. This strong sentiment, combined with the roadway constraints discussed regarding winter maintenance, and the funding constraints discussed above, led the City and its partner agencies to prioritize the inclusion of pedestrian safety improvements along the 1st Avenue corridors along with the Main Street roadway reallocation to provide the highest safety and mobility benefits to community members while committing to a reasonable local match. Based on the required 20% total project cost local match for the SS4A Implementation Grants, the local match for an implementation grant for the Main Street concept design, is estimated to be $5.4M. Were the pedestrian safety treatments included in the 1st Avenue West and 1st Avenue East corridors included in the grant application, the local match is estimated to be $9.1M. Table 6 summarizes the breakdown between SS4A Federal Funding and the local match for each corridor. Table 6. Concept Design Cost Estimates with SS4A Federal / Local Match Corridor Federal Share Local Match Concept Design Cost Estimate Main Street $21,464,000 $5,366,000 $26,830,000 1st Avenue E $8,440,000 $2,110,000 $10,550,000 1st Avenue W $6,588,000 $1,647,000 $8,500,000 Total $36,492,000 $9,123,000 $45,615,000 This memorandum includes information about how bicycle facilities could be implemented on the 1st Avenue corridors in the future, as funding opportunities emerge. Policy Recommendations The Main Street Safety Action Plan (Reference 1) recommended several policies to support multimodal safety in the City of Kalispell. Throughout the second phase of this project, several other policy recommendations were identified that can also further the City’s vision and goals as outlined in the Safety Action Plan. This section outlines these policy recommendations. Bicycle Regulations In Chapter 17 – Motor Vehicles and Traffic of the City of Kalispell’s Code of Ordinances, Article 9 – Bicycles (Reference 6) outlines several regulations regarding the use of bicycles within the city. Primarily adopted in 1947 and 1999, these regulations conflict with how bicycling has developed as part March 2025 Page | 49 of the multimodal transportation system. To support the implementation of bicycle facilities along the 1st Avenue corridors and in the City of Kalispell, it is recommended that the City of Kalispell review and update the regulations for bicycles located in Article 9 of the Code of Ordinances to align with current City values and best practices for promoting a bicycle-friendly community. Winter Maintenance The City of Kalispell’s existing winter maintenance practices entail several elements that provide a high quality of service for the community during the winter months. On collector roads, such as the 1st Avenues, snow is plowed to the center of the road and shaped into berms. This practice maintains two travel lanes for vehicles, in addition to clearing snow from the on-street parking lanes that abut the curb. These practices, while maintaining a high quality of service for people driving cars, emerged as one of the primary constraints for reallocating roadway space to provide dedicated bicycle facilities along the 1st Avenue corridors. It is recommended that the City of Kalispell review these winter maintenance practices to identify areas for modifications in winter maintenance activities to enable the provision of dedicated bicycle facilities in the downtown. For example, the City could consider utilizing on-street parking lanes for snow storage, rather than the center turn lanes, which would allow for the reallocation of the center lane towards bicycle facilities. In this scenario, the City could work with local business owners to ensure that off-street parking is available for community members in the downtown. The City could also consider modifying the snow maintenance practices to haul snow from corridors in the downtown with dedicated bicycle facilities, which would mitigate the necessity for roadway space to be dedicated to snow storage. CONCLUSION This memorandum is intended to provide technical information about the design criteria, community information, traffic analysis, environmental and hydraulic considerations, and other decisions that guided the development of the concept designs and cost estimates produced as part of Phase 2 of the Main Street Safety Action Plan. For further information, please contact Rachel Grosso at rgrosso@kittelson.com or 208-472-9807. March 2025 Page | 50 REFERENCES 1. City of Kalispell. (July 2024). Main Street Safety Action Plan. https://www.mainstreetkalispellsafetyplan.com/ 2. Federal Highway Administration. (2023). Proven Safety Countermeasures. https://highways.dot.gov/safety/proven-safety-countermeasures/ 3. National Association of City Transportation Officials (2022). Urban Streets Design Guide. https://nacto.org/publication/urban-street-design-guide/street-design-elements/curb-extensions/ 4. Montana Department of Transportation. Traffic Engineering Manual. November 2007. 5. City of Kalispell. (September 2021). MOVE 2040: Kalispell Area Transportation Plan. https://www.kalispell.com/DocumentCenter/View/5608/Move-2040-Transportation-Plan 6. City of Kalispell. (July 15, 2024). Code of Ordinances, Chapter 17 Motor Vehicles and Traffic, Article 9 Bicycles. https://ecode360.com/42630014#42630018 7. Transportation Research Board. Highway Capacity Manual, 7th Edition. 2022. 8. Transportation Research Board. Highway Capacity Manual, 2000 Edition. 2000. 9. National Cooperative Highway Research Program. NCHRP Report 812: Signal Timing Manual, 2nd Edition. 2015. 10. Federal Highway Administration. (N.D.) Environmental Review Toolkit – Section 4(f) Tutorial. https://www.environment.fhwa.dot.gov/env_topics/4f_tutorial/default.aspx 11. Montana Department of Transportation. 2024 Bid Item Report. December 2024. 12. City of Kalispell. (July 3, 2017). City of Kalispell Growth Policy: Plan-It 2035. https://www.kalispell.com/DocumentCenter/View/465/Kalispell-Growth-Policy-Plan-It-2035-PDF March 2025 Page | 51 ATTACHMENTS Attachment A Concept Design Drawings Attachment B Design Criteria Spreadsheet Attachment C PMT Meeting Summaries Attachment D Alternative Bicycle Facilities Attachment E Connections to the Existing Network Attachment F August 2024 Traffic Counts Attachment G Signal & AWSC Warrants Attachment H Existing Year 2024 Synchro Operational Worksheets (No Build) Attachment I Existing Year 2024 Synchro Operational Worksheets (Build) Attachment J Future Year 2045 Synchro Operational Worksheets (No Build) Attachment K Future Year 2045 Synchro Operational Worksheets (Build) Attachment L Travel Time Runs Attachment M Environmental Scan Attachment N Hydraulics Analysis Attachment O Community Engagement Materials Attachment P Cost Estimate Attachment A Concept Design Drawings Attachment B Design Criteria Spreadsheet Attachment C PMT Meeting Summaries Attachment D Alternative Bicycle Facilities Attachment E Connections to Existing Network Attachment F August 2024 Traffic Counts Attachment G Signal & AWSC Warrants Attachment H Existing Year 2024 Synchro Operational Worksheets (No Build) Attachment I Existing Year 2024 Synchro Operational Worksheets (Build) Attachment J Future Year 2045 Synchro Operational Worksheets (No Build) Attachment K Future Year 2045 Synchro Operational Worksheets (Build) Attachment L Travel Time Analysis Attachment M Environmental Scan Attachment N Hydraulics Analysis Attachment O Community Engagement Materials March 2025 Page | 67 Attachment P Cost Estimate